In the Ten Commandments there is a verse not to have any other gods on my face. לא יהיה לך אלהים אחרים על פני. What does this mean? Later on there is a verse "I will send my angel before you". אנכי שולח את מלאכי לפניך. That verse was written before the golden calf incident. So it is not a reaction to the golden calf but rather a good thing.
The basic idea of the Ramban seems to center on the idea (in software) of network presentation. That is there is a level of the network that is presented to the user. Behind that is a whole network of connections. There is the satellite up-link, and the hardware transistors, and many subprograms, until you get to what the user is actually seeing.
To the Ramban this is פני "my face" and Metatron and the angel that God promised he would send before the children of Israel. That is the level of interface between God and his world. It is the interface that God chooses to be his representative.
To choose another representation is idolatry because there is nothing behind it. [or perhaps there are bad things behind it.] It is not the representation that God chose to be his representative.
Exodus XX:3 and XXIII:20, 21 would be the relevant places to look at the Ramban.
After the golden calf, God said he would send an angel to guide them, but to the Ramban that was not the angel that was promised before the event of the golden calf which was Metatron.
That means that pantheism is wrong. There is a point at which God's representation stops, and things becomes created from nothing. And not anything or everything can be a presentation of God
Now at this point my learning partner tied this in with something that Rav Nevental --the rav of the old city of Jerusalem said about their making their own representation being the major sin. But the Ramban goes even further and explains that the golden calf simply did not have the software network behind it in the first place.
Appendix:
1) I mean to say here that the Ramban is making a distinction between angels. He equates "my face" with Metatron, and angel of the covenant, and the statement "I will send my angel before you to lead you into the land of Israel." That angel will be an emanation of God. On the other hand there are times when angels are created beings. An example is after the golden calf when God said he would send an angel before them.
2) In any case if you want to see this in more detail then get yourself an English translation of Nachmanides by Chavel. [Or read it in Hebrew on Exodus chapter 20 verse 3.]
3) This explains to us why in yeshivas there is a lot of emotional input into understanding the Oral Torah. That is because what we see here is even if you get the presentation 99% accurate but are wrong on one small thing--that is idolatry.
4) The Ari makes the same distinction as the Ramban but put it at the bottom of Azilut. Question: does that imply a contradiction? No See the Reshash. Shalom Sharabi's Nahar Shalom. [This is printed by the Kabalah Institute at the back of the Eitz Chaim of the Ari.]
The basic idea of the Ramban seems to center on the idea (in software) of network presentation. That is there is a level of the network that is presented to the user. Behind that is a whole network of connections. There is the satellite up-link, and the hardware transistors, and many subprograms, until you get to what the user is actually seeing.
To the Ramban this is פני "my face" and Metatron and the angel that God promised he would send before the children of Israel. That is the level of interface between God and his world. It is the interface that God chooses to be his representative.
To choose another representation is idolatry because there is nothing behind it. [or perhaps there are bad things behind it.] It is not the representation that God chose to be his representative.
Exodus XX:3 and XXIII:20, 21 would be the relevant places to look at the Ramban.
After the golden calf, God said he would send an angel to guide them, but to the Ramban that was not the angel that was promised before the event of the golden calf which was Metatron.
That means that pantheism is wrong. There is a point at which God's representation stops, and things becomes created from nothing. And not anything or everything can be a presentation of God
Now at this point my learning partner tied this in with something that Rav Nevental --the rav of the old city of Jerusalem said about their making their own representation being the major sin. But the Ramban goes even further and explains that the golden calf simply did not have the software network behind it in the first place.
Appendix:
1) I mean to say here that the Ramban is making a distinction between angels. He equates "my face" with Metatron, and angel of the covenant, and the statement "I will send my angel before you to lead you into the land of Israel." That angel will be an emanation of God. On the other hand there are times when angels are created beings. An example is after the golden calf when God said he would send an angel before them.
2) In any case if you want to see this in more detail then get yourself an English translation of Nachmanides by Chavel. [Or read it in Hebrew on Exodus chapter 20 verse 3.]
3) This explains to us why in yeshivas there is a lot of emotional input into understanding the Oral Torah. That is because what we see here is even if you get the presentation 99% accurate but are wrong on one small thing--that is idolatry.
4) The Ari makes the same distinction as the Ramban but put it at the bottom of Azilut. Question: does that imply a contradiction? No See the Reshash. Shalom Sharabi's Nahar Shalom. [This is printed by the Kabalah Institute at the back of the Eitz Chaim of the Ari.]
